With the establishment of numerous international and mixed tribunals in recent years, international criminal law has gained unprecedented importance and continues to expand tremendously. This systematic analysis of substantive international criminal law examines its general principles, sources and evolution as well as specific international crimes, providing an in-depth analysis of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) and customary international law. The updated second edition takes account of the emerging case law of the ICC and other international and national courts in the field. It includes more recent methods of enforcing international criminal law, such as hybrid tribunals, and contains a new separate chapter on implementation.

Friday, October 23, 2009

The Lauterpacht Centre for International Law is pleased to announce the establishment of the Brandon Research Fellowship, funded by the generous gift of Mr Michael Brandon MA, LLB, LLM (Cantab.), MA (Yale), Member of the English Bar (1952) and a Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (1992).

The Brandon Research Fellowship will be awarded on an annual basis and is intended to cover a stay of at least 8 weeks at the Lauterpacht Centre for International Law. The first Fellowship, for 2010, will be worth £3000; any additional travel or other expenses will be the responsibility of the Fellow. Two awards may be made if the strength of the field warrants it.

The Brandon Research Fellow will undertake a project on some aspect of public or private international law or international arbitration while based at the Lauterpacht Centre. Candidates must specify a project in their application. Fellows must produce a report of their work in English at the end of their Fellowship and deposit with the Lauterpacht Centre any publication resulting from the work undertaken during the Fellowship.

Candidates must be fluent in English and at least one of French, German or Spanish. Preference will be given to candidates who are born nationals of members of the European Union (as it was constituted on 1 January 2005); members of the British Commonwealth; Argentina; Brazil; Chile; Switzerland; and the United States of America. Information on requirements and eligibility can be found in the guidance notes below.

The Lauterpacht Centre provides a centre for research in Cambridge for legal practitioners and academics from around the world. The Brandon Research Fellow will be welcomed as part of the community of Visiting Fellows at the Centre. While in Cambridge, Visiting Fellows have the opportunity to meet with other scholars in their field. Visiting Fellows are encouraged to participate fully in the activities of the Centre, including lectures and work in progress seminars on international law and related subjects, and have access to the law libraries in the Centre and the Faculty of Law.

APPLICATION DEADLINE: 30 November 2009

Applications should be submitted in accordance with the guidance notes and using the application form available on the Lauterpacht Centre website. The application should consist of the following:

completed Application Form (including an outline of the proposed research);

a curriculum vitae (max 4 pages);

two letters of reference.

All documents should be prepared in English. Applications must be received by 30 November 2009. Late or incomplete applications will not be considered.

The awarding of arbitration costs and attorneys’ fees in international arbitrations is often arbitrary and unpredictable. In one recent investment arbitration where the tribunal deciding a case under the auspices of the international Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) had broad discretion to award costs and fees, the tribunal allocated arbitration costs evenly amongst the claimant and respondent and required each party to bear its own fees and expenses, even though the claimant prevailed. In another case where the claimant was successful on its substantive claim, the ICSID tribunal ordered the respondent to pay the claimant US$6 million for legal fees, but required the parties to bear the costs of the arbitration equally. And in still another recent investment arbitration the unsuccessful respondent was ordered to pay the costs of the arbitration, but each party was responsible for its own legal fees. These results are not unique to investment arbitrations; they can also be found in international commercial arbitrations.

The lack of uniformity in the awarding of costs and fees poses two major problems. First, arbitrary awards undermine the legitimacy of the dispute resolution system. Second, the lack of predictability may hinder parties from being able to settle the dispute and could rob arbitration of its efficiency. These problems are exacerbated in the international context because the costs and fees in transnational disputes can run into the millions of dollars. Indeed, in one recent celebrated arbitration, the costs and fees totaled over US$21 million.

This article examines the awarding of costs and fees in international commercial arbitrations and transnational investment disputes. My study finds that awards of costs and fees are arbitrary and unpredictable under both systems. To remedy these problems, I propose two different approaches: one for ICSID tribunals and another for international commercial arbitrations. In the case of ICSID arbitrations, the parties should share equally the costs of the arbitration and bear their own legal expenses. In essence, I propose that ICSID adopt what has become known as the American Rule with respect to the awarding of costs and fees. This approach is needed to bring predictability to the field, provide greater administrative efficiency, and reduce the overall costs. In the case of international commercial arbitrations, I argue that parties should be free to select the method for resolving claims for costs and fees, including authorizing the tribunal to resolve such claims pursuant to the principle of “costs follow the event” or the “loser pays” rule. In this context, the adoption of the American Rule would not achieve the same administrative and economic benefits, and the principle of party autonomy calls for this different approach.

The Indian Yearbook of International Law and Policy has issued a call for papers for its inaugural volume. Here's the call:

The Indian Yearbook of International Law and Policy is currently soliciting submissions for its inaugural issue due to be published in March, 2010. We welcome submissions from academics, practitioners, policymakers and students from within the legal community and have a strong preference for articles that are not descriptive but prescriptive and argumentatively focused. The submissions will go through a two-staged peer review process and if necessary, will also be edited by the Editorial Board. Please send in your submissions by January 10, 2010 under the categories mentioned below. For general queries relating to your submissions, see the ‘Note to Authors’ or kindly write to us at: indianyearbook.il@gmail.com.

About the Yearbook

The Indian Yearbook of International Law and Policy is a peer-reviewed academic publication and aims to provide a forum for the publication of articles in the field of international law, written primarily by experts from the region and elsewhere. The Yearbook seeks to provide an intellectual platform for the discussion and dissemination of Indian views and practices on contemporary international legal issues. It also seeks to encourage interest in all matters relating to international law, exploring new avenues and approaches to its study and has been envisaged as a response to the longstanding demand for the documentation of national practice and policy related to international law.

Submission Categories

Submissions may be made under the following categories[1]:

Articles: 8000-12000 words,

Comments/Notes: 4000-7000 words,

Case Comments: 3500-8000 words,

Book Reviews: 2000-4000 words.

Note to Authors

The prescribed word limits are inclusive of footnotes and submissions are expected to conform to length policy and the guidelines listed below. Kindly go through them carefully before mailing your submissions. We promptly acknowledge the receipt of submissions and a decision on publication takes a minimum of around 4-6 weeks.

The issue is out in print within two months of a decision to publish. Requests for expedited reviews can be forwarded to the Editorial Board when the submission is being considered for publication by other journals. Please mention the name of the journal for which your article is in consideration, one contact person in the Editorial Board of that journal and a date by which you expect our response.

Submission Guidelines

Contact Address: Submissions are to be made in electronic form and should be sent to the following e-mail address - indianyearbook.il@gmail.com.

Format: The documents must be in MS Word (.doc) format. All submissions must be double-spaced in Times New Roman. Main text should be in font size 12 and footnotes in font size 10.

Deadline: The Editorial Board has set January 10, 2010 as the deadline for accepting contributions for the 2010 volume.

Abstract: Each contribution is expected to be accompanied by an abstract of not more than 350 words and a declaration to the effect that it has not been published, submitted, or accepted for publication elsewhere.

Style and Formatting Guidelines

Form of Submission: Submissions must be in electronic form. All submissions must be word-processed, double-spaced in Times New Roman. Main text should be in font size 12 and footnotes in font size 10. All submissions must contain an abstract of not more than 350 words.

Title: The Yearbook does not recommend any specific guidelines regarding the titles and sub-titles. However, the main titles must be centered, typed in small capitals and emphasized in bold. The titles must be uniform, concise and descriptive.

Quotations: Quotations should be clearly indicated and it is vital that they are accurate. Double quotation marks should be inserted at the beginning and end of every quotation and where the quotation will run to more than forty words it should be typed as a separate paragraph and left-indented.

Foreign words: Foreign words not currently absorbed into the English language should be italicized, e.g., “inter alia”, “bona fide” etc.

References and Citations: Contributors are requested to adhere to the latest edition of the Harvard Blue Book. [The Blue Book: A Uniform System of Citation (Harvard Law Review Ass'n et al. eds., 18th ed. 2005]. All citations and notes are to be shown as footnotes.

For any queries relating to the theme or the structure of your submissions or any general queries relating to the journal, please contact us at indianyearbook.il@gmail.com.

[1] Longer Contributions under each of the categories shall be considered subject to the approval of the Peer Review Board.

Preventing risks of severe damage from climate change not only requires deep cuts in developed country greenhouse gas emissions, but enormous amounts of public and private investment to limit emissions while promoting green growth in developing countries. While attention has focused on emissions limitations commitments and architectures, the crucial issue of what must be done to mobilize and govern the necessary financial resources has received too little consideration. In Climate Finance, a leading group of policy experts and scholars show how effective mitigation of climate change will depend on a complex mix of public funds, private investment though carbon markets, and structured incentives that leave room for developing country innovations. This requires sophisticated national and global regulation of cap-and-trade and offset markets, forest and energy policy, international development funding, international trade law, and coordinated tax policy.

Thirty-six targeted policy essays present a succinct overview of the emerging field of climate finance, defining the issues, setting the stakes, and making new and comprehensive proposals for financial, regulatory, and governance mechanisms that will enrich political and policy debate for many years to come. The complex challenges of climate ­finance will continue to demand fresh insights and creative approaches. The ideas in this volume mark out starting points for essential institutional and policy innovations.

Today, a California resident can incorporate her shipping business in Delaware, register her ships in Panama, hire her employees from Hong Kong, place her earnings in an asset-protection trust formed in the Cayman Islands, and enter into a same-sex marriage in Massachusetts or Canada--all the while enjoying the California sunshine and potentially avoiding many facets of the state's laws.

In this book, Erin O'Hara and Larry E. Ribstein explore a new perspective on law, viewing it as a product for which people and firms can shop, regardless of geographic borders. The authors consider the structure and operation of the market this creates, the economic, legal, and political forces influencing it, and the arguments for and against a robust market for law. Through jurisdictional competition, law markets promise to improve our laws and, by establishing certainty, streamline the operation of the legal system. But the law market also limits governments' ability to enforce regulations and protect citizens from harmful activities. Given this tradeoff, O'Hara and Ribstein argue that simple contractual choice-of-law rules can help maximize the benefits of the law market while tempering its social costs. They extend their insights to a wide variety of legal problems, including corporate governance, securities, franchise, trust, property, marriage, living will, surrogacy, and general contract regulations.

The effective promotion, protection and fulfilment of economic, social and cultural (ESC) rights is an important but under-explored component of international human rights law, of which ESC rights form an essential part. They are fundamental to the dignity of every person. At the international level ESC rights are protected in several international instruments, the most comprehensive being the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (the Covenant) ratified by a majority of States. However, claims of violations of ESC rights are treated less seriously. This book subjects ESC rights protected in the Covenant to a deeper analysis in light of the practice of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights while taking into account other relevant sources of ESC rights at national, regional and international levels. It also analyses key issues relevant to ESC rights, with particular emphasis on various themes including State obligations; non-State actor's obligations; women's ESC rights; domestic protection of ESC rights; and State reservations to ESC rights. The book further makes a thorough examination of the rights to work, health, and education. By so doing, it demonstrates that ESC rights are justiciable and must not be marginalised. The book also brings together a collection of essential materials on ESC rights needed to understand and analyse the subject. Written by an international human rights scholar, this timely work will be of value to all those interested in human rights and international law.

Since 2005 the carbon market has grown to a value of nearly $100 billion per annum. This new book examines all the main legal and policy issues which are raised by emissions trading and carbon finance. It covers not only the Kyoto Flexibility Mechanisms but also the regional emission trading scheme in the EU and emerging schemes in the US, Australia, and New Zealand. The Parties to the 1992 UN Framework Convention are in the process of negotiating a successor regime to the 1997 Kyoto Protocol whose first commitment period ends in 2012. As scientists predict that the threat of dangerous climate change requires much more radical mitigation actions, the negotiations aim for a more comprehensive and wide ranging agreement which includes new players - such as the US - as well as taking account of new sources (such as aircraft emissions) and new mechanisms such as the creation of incentives for reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation.

Vera Gowlland-Debbas (Graduate Institute of International Studies - Law) will deliver a lecture today as part of the UCL Laws Current Legal Problems Lecture Series on "The Interplay Between International Legal Regimes: Some Current Critical Issues."

While peace is the overarching goal of the United Nations, questions of war and peace are not always directly considered in the day-to-day work of the International Law Commission (ILC). The sixtieth anniversary of the ILC provides an occasion to reflect on the role and the responsibility, but also on the limits, of the ILC in the area of peace and security.

Three areas of the Commission’s work will be assessed: the law of State responsibility and the law of treaties as "classics" among the topics treated by the ILC. In addition, the topic of shared natural resources is likely to have an increasing importance for peace and security in the future.

Eric David (l'Université libre de Bruxelles - Law) will deliver a lecture today at the Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies on "Conditions d'application du droit international humanitaire aux conflits armés internes."

This paper proposes a different perspective on the problem of bilateralism versus multilateralism than what has been offered in the literature to date. It proposes to look at the problem through the prism of the Subsidiarity principle. While this principle has mainly been used in the context of allocation of authority between various levels of government in federal or quasi-federal systems of government, I propose to use it in the analysis of the various layers of international economic law and in relation to the choice of bilateral, regional or plurilateral regimes over multilateral ones. Such an analysis can provide both a normative criterion as well as an explanatory tool in relation to the reality of booming bilateralism. The objective of the paper is to develop parameters analogous to those used in the federalist discourse but adapted to the subject matter of international economic law. These parameters incorporate both the efficiency and the political/ethical rationales of the Subsidiarity principle. In particular, it dictates that actions should be taken on less centralistic levels, closer to the point of action, where measures more precisely targeted and more closely attuned to the needs of the parties involved may be taken. Through this perspective, just as well-functioning provincial and local governments may serve as building blocks for a leaner, better functioning and more democratic central government, bilateral and regional regimes may serve as important building blocks for a leaner, better functioning and more democratic multilateral organization.

Multijuralism is a fundamental attribute of the globalizing world, not merely as a result of the public creation of multijural states or trading zones, but also as a result of privately generated multi-jurisdictional transactions and relationships. Both public and private rule-making are important to the development of law in multijural settings. As important, however, is the dynamic development of rules through the process of interpretation and adjudication. Indeed, harmonization of law through the adoption of literally similar legal rules or contract provisions may have little impact on the harmonization of the ultimate legal treatment of particular conduct if legal rules are interpreted and adjudicated differently in different legal regimes. Courts need access to grounded problem-specific knowledge in order for harmonization to be effective across multiple jurisdictions. The principal source of this judicial legal human capital (Hadfield 2006) is the legal human capital generated by lawyers for clients and shared with courts in the process of dispute resolution. Consequently the global markets in which lawyers' investments in multijural legal human capital take place are important not merely for how well they serve the interests of particular clients but, more fundamentally, for how well they work to generate the legal human capital that ultimately feeds into the quality of the harmonization work of courts. These global legal markets, however, are characterized by both market failure and monopoly restrictions. Market failures arise because of the difficulties that attend the production and distribution of information, difficulties that in other settings are mitigated through the use of intellectual property protection, public subsidy and so on. Law firms are an important organizational form for overcoming legal human capital market failures. In the multijural setting, however, extensive jurisdiction-specific monopolies over the provision of legal services inhibit the development of truly multi-jurisdictional law firms. Reducing the barriers to multi-jurisdictional legal practice is an important policy step in the direction of promoting the harmonization of law in a multijural world.

The proliferation of international tribunals has given rise to much concern about potential conflicts between judicial decisions and possible ‘fragmentation’ of international law. Most of the discussions have focused on conflicts of jurisdictions and conflicts of norms that may result from competing or overlapping jurisdictions. The worst type of conflicts however is the conflict of obligations where a State cannot comply with the decisions of two tribunals at once because their separate decisions require the State to act in opposite directions.

Unfortunately, such a direct conflict of obligations has occurred as a result of the decision of the WTO Appellate Body in the case of Brazil - Tyres (DS332). The Appellate Body held that, by following the ruling of an arbitral tribunal of Mercosur - the regional trade agreement (RTA) between several South American countries - Brazil acted inconsistently with WTO rules. Furthermore, in the subsequent compliance proceedings a WTO arbitrator refused to allow Brazil time to negotiate a solution with other Mercosur countries. Consequently, Brazil found itself in a legal bind: it could not comply with WTO obligations without breaching its Mercosur obligations. Significantly, this conflict of obligations did not stem from competing or overlapping jurisdictions or conflicting treaty norms. Instead, it occurred entirely as a result of the Appellate Body’s interpretation of a WTO provision.

This paper submits that the conflict in this case could have been avoided because alternative interpretations, arguably legally sounder ones, do exist, and should have been avoided because there are international rules requiring a presumption against conflicts in treaty interpretation. The paper suggests that in rendering its decision the Appellate Body showed little concern regarding conflicts with the RTA, and that such lack of concern reflected an outdated mindset of WTO centrality or superiority. In light of international legal principles and the realities of the multi-polar global trading environment, the WTO judiciary is urged to adopt a clear policy on the avoidance of conflicts with RTA decisions.

The Grotius Centre for International Legal Studies (Leiden Law School & Campus Den Haag) has two PhD vacancies for the project ‘Post-Conflict Justice and Local Ownership’ funded by the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO).

Background

The project will involve research and testing of the design and management of international criminal justice. It examines rationales and methodologies of external intervention in justice responses, the societal impact of international criminal proceedings, based on analysis of the first practice of the International Criminal Court (ICC), and the contribution of the ICC to capacity-building and legal harmonisation in conflict and post-conflict situations.

The PhD will examine the empirical and methodological problems associated with impact-measurement of international criminal justice. It will study the effects of international investigations and prosecutions on the basis of the first investigations and prosecutions of the ICC (Democratic Republic of Congo, Uganda, Sudan and Central African Republic).

2. PHD POSITION: Contribution of international criminal justice to domestic capacity-building and harmonisation

Vacancy number: 9-202a

The second PhD will examine to what extent ICC membership and international investigation and prosecution has served as a catalyst for domestic justice and implementation of international legal standards in ICC situation-countries. It will analyse the scope and forms of local justice responses to ICC activities, domestic law reform activities, reception of ICC jurisprudence and interaction with the rights and interests of victims.

Appointment

Successful applicants will be appointed for a fixed-term period of 4 years, with continuation dependent upon an evaluation after 12 months. The gross monthly salary will be in accordance with the Collective Agreement of Dutch Universities for academic personnel, and will range from € 2.042,- per month in the first year, gradually rising to € 2.612,- in the final year.

Further information

More information on the project and these positions can be found on the website of the Grotius Centre. More information about these vacancies can be obtained from Dr. Carsten Stahn, E-Mail: cstahn@campusdenhaag.nlor Dr. Larissa van den Herik, E-Mail: L.van.den.Herik@LAW.leidenuniv.nl. Deadline for applications: 6 November 2009.

For most of modern history, dual citizenship was considered an anomaly at best and an abomination at worst. It has since become a commonplace of globalization. The sequence has been from strong disfavor to toleration; some states have moved to embrace the status. Could plural citizenship now achieve the status of a right?

This essay makes a bounded case for recognizing a right to acquire and/or maintain plural citizenship where an individual is otherwise eligible for the status. It does so through the optics of freedom of association and liberal autonomy values. Citizenship comprises both a form of association and a vehicle for individual identity. The liberal state has no business obstructing alternate national ties in the absence of a compelling interest. That interest once existed, to the extent that dual nationality destabilized interstate relations, and explains the historical opprobrium attached to the status. Laws directed at reducing the incidence of dual citizenship may also unjustifiably burden the exercise of political rights.

Today, the material downside risks (if any) posed by plural citizens have dissipated to the point that the state is no longer justified in suppressing the status. To the extent that dual citizenship undermines social solidarities necessary to liberal governance, that is too diffuse an interest to overcome individual autonomy values. The essay concludes with some indirect evidence from practice that dual citizenship is gaining traction as a right.

The Melbourne Journal of International Law has issued a call for papers for the first issue of its eleventh volume, due to be published in June 2010. The submission deadline is January 29, 2010. Here's the call:

The Editors of the Melbourne Journal of International Law (‘MJIL’) invite submissions on areas of interest in international law for the first issue of their 11th volume, to be published in June 2010.

MJIL, Australia’s premier generalist international law journal, is a peer-reviewed academic journal run through the Melbourne Law School at the University of Melbourne. MJIL’s objective is to facilitate scholarly research and critical discussion of private and public international law issues.

Submissions

MJIL is a bi-annual publication, published in June and October each year.

MJIL publishes articles, commentaries, case notes and book reviews. Articles should be in the vicinity of 10 000 to 20 000 words in length and be an original and detailed contribution to international law scholarship. Commentaries explore recent developments in a specific field of international law and their practical applications, and should be between 5000 and 8000 words in length.

Submission Process

All articles, case notes, commentaries and review essays published in MJIL are subjected to a double-blind refereeing process, involving at least two specialists in the field. Once accepted for publication, submissions will then be edited for compliance with the Melbourne Manual for International Law Citation and the Australian Guide to Legal Citation. Authors have an opportunity to review the final version of the piece prior to publication. Our publication policy can be accessed at http://mjil.law.unimelb.edu.au/submit/policy.pdf.

All submissions should be sent to law-mjil@unimelb.edu.au in Word format, together with a signed publication policy.

Pitman Potter (Univ. of British Columbia) will give a talk today at the Hebrew University Faculty of Law International Law Forum on "China and the Reception of International Law Under Conditions of Globalization."

The Convention for the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 9 December 1948, is one of the most important instruments of contemporary international law. It was drafted in the aftermath of the Nuremberg trial to give flesh and blood to the well-known dictum of the International Military Tribunal, according to which 'Crimes against international law are committed by men, not by abstract entities, and only by punishing individuals who commit such crimes can the provisions of international law be enforced'. At Nuremberg, senior state officials who had committed heinous crimes on behalf or with the protection of their state were brought to trial for the first time in history and were held personally accountable regardless of whether they acted in their official capacity.

The drafters of the Convention on Genocide crystallized the results of the Nuremberg trial and thus ensured its legacy. The Convention established a mechanism to hold those who committed or participated in the commission of genocide, the crime of crimes, criminally responsible. Almost fifty years before the adoption of the Rome Statute, the Convention laid the foundations for the establishment of the International Criminal Court. It also obliged its Contracting Parties to criminalise and punish genocide.

This book is a much-needed Commentary on the Genocide Convention. It analyses and interprets the Convention thematically, thoroughly covering every article, drawing on the Convention's travaux préparatoires and subsequent developments in international law. The most complex and important provisions of the Convention, including the definitions of genocide and genocidal acts, have more than one contribution dedicated to them, allowing the Commentary to explore all aspects of these concepts. The Commentary also goes beyond the explicit provisions of the Convention to discuss topics such as the retroactive application of the Convention, its status in customary international law and its future.